tv [untitled] October 10, 2012 5:30am-6:00am PDT
all these people, including myself, i®j]w hear asking you to support the democratic process. there's much more at stake here thanu9- all the convolutions6 interpretation. there are independent voters making a decision and you know law says, and you are notdqkz confused, i don't believe, on what has to be done. so i wish youphxbz great deal of courage, and i hope you reinstate rossanf mirkarimi. >> hi.]qí72 my name is -- cayman, a resident of the2u richmond district. i wasn't going to speak until i heard someoneknfoy speak about - poll. i was polled by that poll. let me tell you about thattó po. that was the most outrageous bsw
push-pull i have ever heard. before they asked a question about removal they frontlbeyt it with all sorts of negative one-sided information about ross support having a sheriff who pled guilty to domestic violence, do you support having a sheriffkx=lu that's on probat, and, you know, at the very end questions like that, in that side, only then did they ask do you support removing sheriff ross6 mirkarimi. okay. this is absolutely outrageous. this poll was commissioned2p@qv friends of willie brown, a made up the order of the questions and the questioning they could produce the results that they wanted. even under those conditions, something like!.2f 30, 40% of te people said no, we still don't want ross removed. in fact iniyñ the richmond dist where i live it was 51-40tify ur
those conditions. if that's the way those numbers favor of keeping our sheriff, not taking9lúó away our votes. you know they say that this is going to be a tough vote, a courageous vote. thing to do is the politically expedient thing to doañxm-áuáq the people of this city, they're right here, they're right here. they've been here allmo-1 day. this is the base. this is the voters of the city. >> president chiu: next speakerh;#n . >> i'm ann garrison. i did a lotésúñ reporting about this. early on i spoke to jeff adachig about the way prosecution have changed during the years that he said that before 1996, the response to this, alñd incident with no serious injury
been pretrial diversion including counseling for both spouses if theyepeñ both wanted. he sad said he thinkscggkñ it'd the criminal justice system takes domestic violence more seriously than in the pastshidtt because there is no longer a pretrial diversion option in any helpful response for couples like rossu4t@c and eliana that t to stay together. the only positive social outcomes)gk that i can imaginea change in the law to make that the other positive outcome would be this board's decision to restore sheriff mirkarimitg' to office. all the people in this room, and many more, would feel empowered togáqtñ fight for their right to vote. ethics commission hearings on sf gov tv and one moment stands out, thereo#iç was an absolutely inane exchange going on, as to
domestic violence applied to this new year's eve incident finally said i don't care what you call it, office. i don't think so5e2a. san francisco. i've been watching this#z÷ at h. i don't know who's drummed the table all night but it's hard to follow%zc this. i wish they'd stop. anyway, i came here, and it's hard to come heren;ñwó because i don't really believe in politics as it exists much anymore. seems like war is on the agenda whatever party you're in. the war against the poorm$ ÷ isn the agenda, whatever party you're in. the neighborhood ircgnp came thh to get here is ripe with crime. i wish the policeñom3 would get of their cars and walk the beat instead of riding around inhb%z
circles and letting poom i know die on the sidewalks. i know them. i.+ see them die. i don't know all the answers to all this but i did come here becauseepé i love san francisco. and i want to be a part of thesl eloquent people who came -- i can't say anything better than any ofsk&ç them. they've all said their own minds, and i hope you all admire the domestic violence survivors who are brave against all this. but that's part of san francisco, and ti7/ñ people run this city. it's a special place. ñ, it, and i had -- my piece and reinstate ross mirkarimi.%+n the people elected him. it would be wrong not to. if he's not elected,
and now theyúy$nd trying to thry boss, the sheriff, under the curb. and you know what,çi#/& ed lee,i disagree. ♪ because all you're doing is br5gjt hardship on this man's family. ♪ and itt ain't no mystery. ♪ just check your history.a]nám ♪ i'm just working on a case involve a lot ofo3l conspiracy. ♪ but what's going down, blacks aredvn brown. ♪ because this is jerry's second time around. talking about but ross knows what i'm talking about. we go way(gjoy back. he's here for people of the community and african-american of the community and all the
things. we all have this space that we to something that happens to us. thing that we all have, all of something personal that's happening in our lives. that was takenm8isu(v from her. she went through her process of do i do with this. she thought about some things.8ñ and in the end she decided not to call the police. really intend to call the police %iox+he was just kind of saying okay, what would happen if. then we all know what happened afterye that. and to me, that's a very important part of this1c ñ case. because after that, you know, there was this iron first that,t came down and the whole thing
was very cruel. we all just watcheda=z and its not cool at all. you know, life can be messy that's another thing i want to say. life is not perfect. people are not perfect. and9/ç6)by they never will be. talk about domestic violence is label and say you're supposed to >> president chiu: thank you >> hello. here to recommend ross mirkarimi be reinstated to office as soon asg;hó possible. people of san francisco chose ross to be our sheriff and itmn would be a great injustice to
the democratic process to have anythingxj:+uñ i heard people today call ross' actions criminal and serious. react to a situation concerning two people that he lovesks](z d. was it the most appropriate action? i think most people would argue to put forward is the test of acceptable humanjrp nature. would i call that action a crime? the action human? yes i would. to grab an arm whenoktb] somethg thinks they're going to lose someone they love is a human reactiy traffic your reaction is to grab them and pull themíj back. i don't think that is a serious crime to me:rl'. as far as what we're doing here tonight is deciding if official misconducty][f has occurred, toe it sounds like the charter does- not specifically have the words
that includethsrf sheriff-electr any person that has been elected, is not in officeghkkñ . so to stretch the definition out to fit politicalk,%úa agendas io not think is going to serve the city. thank you veryqm!r much. speaker. >> good evening, his]z5@@&c"p%s. my name is tammy bryant and i'm broken glasses. i want to stress this is not about domestic?:n$ violence. they have no legal argument to make so they make an emotional onelléuk to compensate for theik of any taste. nobody here condones domestic violence butn)>0p we condemn a t of family crisis being transformed into the life of th century for illegal and financial gain. tp-e.]@álprk is who the voters we cannot support the same
suppression that we abhor in lí/#%ave over 1500 signatures. these are the people of san francisco who support every person who signed this petition there's another thousand who support him. they're biased, unscientific and don't represent8zñ the fact. everywhere i go people come up sheriff. everywhere he goes when he's out tell him how much they support him. people of san francisco support our sheriff. i'm not here to make an@m$jm emotional argument, i'm not here to enthusiastically create the great work ofahx him. i want you to decide this on the legal merits of the case because reenstate punishment no@? misconduct occurred. if the d.a../=( thought they wod prevail they would not have offered the plea. investigates or prosecutes dom
he can2]: violence. he -- housing them. he can actually serven0>< as an excellent role model and example for successfulfv rehabilitation. i'm a dv survivor. make no mistake about it i do notfa consider this conviction o be valid, no crime was committed but oftentimes innocentd5zfv pee are compelled to plead a lesser charge to -- an erroneous conviction.
ask everyone to please sit down or else i will ask deputy out of the room so we can continue with oura+ 9 speak in are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in publicil=:u comment. please step up.t. other microphone6+yes. >> good evening, supervisors. it has been a long day. it's been an=)fñ exciting day. and a very informative day indemcnmf7(p&c @&c"p%i think the demonstration that we just saw, i'm not going to -- i xz!"6z thy pretty much closed it out and i think i want to close it out byz saying that, you know, all
political agendas aside, you have toáhgó do the right thing. i think that karma7xfç is a big thing, and it does come back to trying to cut the head off of>úk one man, you end up cuttig the head off of many of you in very, very careful in considering/'l your decision, because it could really come back to hauntí+oñ you. you see a lot of power in this room. and the people are power. each sñnp'd every one of you hae been put in this seat by everybody sitting back here, myself included.8x;÷n and inasmuch as we can indeed put you in, we can take you out. relay $1$ñ on to mayor ed lee. no one is÷b/8yñ indestructible r invincible and you cannot necessarily hide[sñym behind cld doors.
we will get you inevitably.svi2] so, please, i know mr. ross mirkarimi, and i have great fondness for#jz him. i sit on his reentry council and i've learned a great deal from and this is not the way to do it. it's not the way to do it. has a lot of power for these be careful how you vote. >> president chiu: thank you. >> good evening. tab buckner.vá1[ç whether we like it in this chamber or not, whether each of you like it orwg>9 this is going to be considered one of the defining moments of your people will never forget this moment. what happened is)[6($ an unfore incident between a couple of people can happen between anyóon two people who care was taken advantage of politically, hasu blown up, and now what i ask you
is to think about your own integrity. do you hav.[ the integrity to think about what your decision will be.ke[vj are you thinking more about the merits of what happened, or are you thinking about whom you owe÷ your political chips to, who is writing you a check. this is that moment that wehñ6he going to remember. and something that you will be thought -- remembered about fro. i realize we're not quite up to the next ordinance on the a sense you're all standing naked2-cti tonight. so i really plead with you to do what you feel can demonstrate your personaldggcx integrity, yr independence, not from whom you you owe here in the city, having taken the oath of office to represent allm÷ people fairly in this city. and the democratic processzp] of which their elections demonstrate. thank you. >> president chiu: thank you.
>> hi.'jmgy my name's larry edmunds. when i ran for mayor6 got eight votes. it was larryb"[ jerome edmunds. the president was here, the first family. forward, we really need to do -- i was sitting home,sr from 2:00 to 7:00 when you took the break. you all gave me a headache innkñ the ambassador hotel. you don't know what abuse is. you areuj=f domestic abuse, spe abuse. i went to co-op yuntd?f1xm for violence meeting and they told me -- in the house, something is like the lady who told you about going on in san francisco. i live in the tenderloin. people in san frq%pw(r)y of
bayview now. you trying to kill us in these sron t hotels. there's a lot of abuse. those women who want to work on abuse andec2ñ have san francisco become a number one city once again this city is called the talekglsç of two cities and wee seen this today. it is time for us to get back on track. thez6ñ8 world is waiting. they looking. this is not a -- it does feel like mitt'n romney is here. they got mitt romney face⌝8>daá. because as you know i want to address as --níís÷ with a fara t wig. igñgbe9- i may have to do the mitt romney thing this time. san francisco you have to do better1dfc because this is thet hope of america. the ocean is right here and we fall off into=txrk4x it, the pac ocean. you know what, you know this mayor, if you don't really have aspiration to be a mayor we see where you end up at. this is not right and you all
have to be a democratic party that makes america look like we have justice in this part of the world. thank you. >> president chiu: thank you. -n speaker. >> good evening. my name is alex. i'm not here to defend ross, specifically. i think there's been enough of evidence and counterevidence. what i think is important is if the board is willing, with the mayor, to try someone at a level of ethics, and i agree with some of the other speakers, i think we have to hold everybody to that same standard. and there are a lot of people in this city that work hard for the city, and there are a lot of people that have hidden agendas. and that's throughout the departments. and i think it bears that if you make this decision to take one person down ethically that you should look at everyone else and
yourselves. and i think that's just a part of voting for your conscience and being entirely fair about this process. so none of you are here because you have a bad agenda. and i don't believe ross had any bad intentions to become sheriff. something happened in his private life, and i'm not sure whether that really supports this huge circus that has now surrounded our city, has involved you. you all look stressed out. i can't imagine being the president of the board dealing with this. but i wish you godspeed and hope you make the right decision. thank you. >> president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> hi, supervisors. always got to have the last wo word. as a former victim of domestic violence, myself, and someone
who has followed this case from the beginning, i can say with a certainty that this has become, in my view, a setup and a political football. i would like to see you vote on this with equanimity, and not allow ross mirkarimi to become a scapegoat in this process. i think that maybe this has been said before, but i think that eliana was subjected to a setup. and it is so clear to see this. ross is -- would make an excellent sheriff. i would like to see him reinstated. so please vote your conscience, and as a former survivor of
domestic violence who was always on the side of the woman, i can say that i think this is -- it's clear that this has been used in the most manipulative of ways. so thank you very much for letting me say this. >> president chiu: thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in public comment in if there are any other members of the public, please line up on the right-hand side. >> hi. i just have a really short thing to say to you. supervisors, if you love san francisco, ross and his family have been through a whole, whole lot. and ross is here, still wanting to be sheriff. so, you know, if you care about san francisco, i would grab him now before he changes his mind.
>> president chiu: next speaker please. >> good evening, supervisors. i served 30 years ago on your board, and i have been very distressed -- pardon me, john -- i'm very distressed of the fact that we have gone through such a really deplorable process by overreaching our authority by the executive branch, in a broad interpretation of an authority. i would hope that you would exercise the same broad interpretation in terms of reasserting the board's responsibility in upholding what should have been the vote of the people, and not be usurped. and for not setting yourselves
up for setting a precedent for the future. there will be great destructive for our city. thank you. >> president chiu: thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in public comment? okay. colleagues, any final questions to the parties involved? at this time, this hearing has been held and -- colleagues, this question's in the hands of the board. supervisor olague. >> supervisor olague: i took a very pragmatic approach to reviewing the charges and establishing my understanding of both the facts and the recommendation before us. as a member of this board, i take very seriously the responsibility to represent the citizens of my district and of the city, and to uphold the duties required of me as outlined by the charter.
part of those responsibilities put me here today to exercise an authority that has never before been tested and certainly was unexpected. as many have said, today's hearing is unprecedented, and i think that it is a very important factor to remember. our decision today will set the tone for the future, should there unfortunately be another accusation of misconduct by a public official. as supervisors, we have the opportunity to make decisions, and create a legacy that outlasts our time in office. considering that, i find it important in making this decision to assure the public that i am aware of the long-lasting impacts there will be on the law, the sheriff, and his family. the community of domestic violence prevention advocates, the over all moral of the city and county of san francisco now
and in the future. whatever the outcome my hope is that all of us, as residents of this city, will use this as an opportunity to fine-tune our moral compass, to lean more toward honor, nobility, justice and compassion. with that said, i think it is important to note the process that i went through in evaluating the issue. when determining whether to sustain the charges as issued by the mayor, and recommended by the ethics commission, i worked backwards. i thought of it in the context of, in order to remove the sheriff, what would be necessary. and in my opinion, the removal of any elected official from office requires that the mayor supply evidence that demonstrates with great certainty that the charter prescribed definition of official misconduct was violated. so these are the different things i took into consideration. intention of the voters. as ethics commission president
hur stated the voters intended for this tool, this exceptional power of the mayor, to be useful and narrow. while san francisco is surely a place that is different and operates to the beat of its own drum i challenge the idea that the voters of this city and county intended to set a precedent that ignores the fundamental tenet ofs of democracy by equipping the mayor with extraordinary capabilities. it would set a dangerous precedent to enable any mayor with such power that he or she could turn a executive -- into a political tactic. to apply this sector of the chart with disregard of the will of the voters and opens the door to allow the power of political machines to override the voice of the people. limited scope, i agree with commissioner hur in that charter section 15.105(e) was meant to be applied with a